<!--QuoteBegin-Mantrid+Oct 14 2004, 11:00 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Mantrid @ Oct 14 2004, 11:00 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Okay, the only known method, aside from actually folding space-time so that two points touch.
Show me another method. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> ...Show me any mode of teleportation above sub-atomic particles...
Please get back on topic and start a new one for the, "Hey, how many types of teleportation are there?" discussion.
I'm for the picture a few pages back. Something I haven't noted yet, though: I'd be willing to dematerialize myself and send the data across the universe to save or help someone I'd be willing to die for, though <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo--> . Although, you'll never know which part is right...It'd be nice if teleporting through destruction worked...it just doesn't look like it would on any basis (especially since it's new material).
They would appear to be the same person, and for all intents and purposes they are you, exactly the same as if you had been transported by pixie dust instead and hadn't been killed in the process. They become different once they start to experience different things from the original, who is dead.
There have been cases before of people being clinically dead coming back to life. Does it mean that just because they were dead then they can't be the same person they were before?
This harks back to my sleep question, which was misunderstood, I think. I understand that you think it is that you have the chance to experience things, but I disagree. If I am dead, and somebody moves me from one table to another to save my life and then my heart starts again (just imagine =D), then I didn't have the chance to experience it, as I was dead, but I am still there.
and I love wizard's question about the colour the ground . That made me just sit up and really boggle.
Unfortunately I live in Australia, so the ground could be red on either.
Let us say that I teleport twice in my life time, and that on both occasions, whether by insane circumstance or that I'm extremely unlucky, that the teloport malfunctions on both occasions.
This results in myself being teleported, but the machine forgot to destroy the original in BOTH cases.
The result is, there are three of me now. One is working in the sulfur mines of Venus, ensuring the atmospheric shielding system stays online. The other is working on Mars helping the Terraforming process take place. While fuddy duddy old me is still on Earth posting on message boards drinking coke and otherwise wasting his life.
Now, had the teleporter NOT malfunctioned, I WOULD HAVE BEEN KILLED AND THIS CONSTITUTES A MURDER.
The copy is me for all intents and purposes, but he is a seperate ENTITY of me, he has my essence, my memories, my thoughts and my feelings, but he is another container and thus over time he will differ from me. The Me on mars will come to be entranced by the hardiness of life and it's utter determination to survive. The Me on Venus becomes a hardened man seeing far too many men lost to the crushing poisoning cloistering atmosphere. Meanwhile the Me on earth has found new uses for navel lindt and goes on to become a trillionaire.
Using the flame example, If I were a lit match, and I were to be held to an unlit match and another flame were to spring forth, then he would be a copy of me, but he would evolve to become a different person given enough time. If I were snuffed out, and the other allowed to live, that is no less a murder then cloning me and then killing me.
Now, if you transferred my conciousness over into a machine, then destroyed my body, that would not be a murder because my sentience is still intact. If I were sent along with the datastream on how to construct my body, then that would be okay.
But the destruction of the vessel within which my conciousness resides is a murder. No copy can take my place, and by that same token I can take none of my copies places. Each individual, despite being utterly the same to begin with has every right to live.
Killing a man while he sleeps is murder. The method of teleportation presented in the first post is no different then making a clone of me, transferring a copy of my memories into him and then killing me. <b>I</b> am still dead. My <i>Essence</i> may continue to exist but <b>I</b> cease to exist as a person.
Consider it to be a mathematical equation.
My particular conciousness may have the equation...
Y = X^4+6X^2+loge(15)
My copy has the SAME equation, but as life goes on, differences may accrue in the constant, so although he is essentially the same person in the sense of ESSENCE, his particulate conciousness may read like...
Y = X^4+6X^2+e^(3)
or
Y = X^4+6X^2+sin(33)
or even
Y = X^4+6X^2 + (4X^3+12X) <----- Life Shattering Event!
perhaps even
Y = X^4+6X^2 + X^5/5+3X^3 + C <------- Life Building Event!
Granted that life cannot be reduced to mere simplistic equations, but each equation is absolutely unique provided that the constants that seperate them are different.
In other words, I follow a particular pattern of behaviour layed down by my history as shown in the initial psuedo-conciousness equation Y = X^4+6X^2. Provided the additional factor of loge(15) is my current environment, and hence will change if I teleport to another location. The second last equation, Y = X^4+6X^2 + (4X^3+12X), is the original equation followed by it's differential. This is an analogy to a life shattering event, such as my copy learning that the colony he has teleported to has strict rules and that he will be lobotomised and forced into slave labour for the rest of his life for sneezing. The last equation is the original followed by it's integral (or anti-differential) which in this manner is used to draw an analogy to a life building event, such as, finding the woman of my dreams on that colony, or becoming the leader of a particular colony and leading it onwards to prosperity.
This lets out a major question though. If you teleport a baby, whos conciousness hasnt yet had time to form... are you murdering him?
You are not ending his essence, but his physical form DOES die (even if it is replaced later down the track). A Definite gray area.
Oh, by the way, an MS paint job to help illustrate some of my early points.
<!--QuoteBegin-marce+Oct 15 2004, 12:15 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (marce @ Oct 15 2004, 12:15 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> not a completely different person.
They would appear to be the same person, and for all intents and purposes they are you, exactly the same as if you had been transported by pixie dust instead and hadn't been killed in the process. They become different once they start to experience different things from the original, who is dead.
There have been cases before of people being clinically dead coming back to life. Does it mean that just because they were dead then they can't be the same person they were before?
This harks back to my sleep question, which was misunderstood, I think. I understand that you think it is that you have the chance to experience things, but I disagree. If I am dead, and somebody moves me from one table to another to save my life and then my heart starts again (just imagine =D), then I didn't have the chance to experience it, as I was dead, but I am still there.
and I love wizard's question about the colour the ground . That made me just sit up and really boggle.
Unfortunately I live in Australia, so the ground could be red on either.
<.< >.>
Maybe I live on mars? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I'm still going to say you have a chance (be it incredibly minimal) to wake up while 'clinically' dead. Just because your heart stops doesn't make you dead that instant, just because you're considered dead based on the fact the main organ keeping you alive has stopped. You'll maintain your life until there's no point at which you can be revived (with any point in between giving you a chance of becoming alive again).
It's the same way if you were cryogenically put to sleep. Say you've got so many drugs in you that you can't wake up yourself (so, technically, there's not chance you'd wake up - which in a way gets around my definition), however, once someone decides to stop the drugs and cryogenic freezer, you're up again.
Trying to think of an easier way to say it.
You require the oppurtunity at any frame of reference in which you would need to pass to reach your next instant of cognition, through your actions or someone elses, to recognize and remember your surrounding stimuli from one moment of your life to the next instant, even if it is forgotten in a second or stays with you through your lifetime.
Thus: If you're asleep, you can wake up. If you're cryogenically frozen, you can be thawed. If your heart stops, it can be restarted. If you're in a coma, you can wake up. If you're knocked out, you can be revived.
And that is, if you instantly transport somewhere: you would not have had the chance to remember every frame of reference you entered from your trips beginning to its destination and end. This also means (as I said before, somewhere), if you manage to go the speed of light you could remember every frame of reference you passed through (of course, time would stretch to infinity, and you'd use all the energy in the universe, but that's not really the point).
and I love wizard's question about the colour the ground . That made me just sit up and really boggle.
Unfortunately I live in Australia, so the ground could be red on either.
<.< >.>
Maybe I live on mars? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Thats why I pose such questions in these threads. It isn't the answer that matters but rather thought process you follow while trying to come up with an answer.
If you really wanted to get tricky the ground would be 1/2 red and 1/2 brown until you looked at it.
<!--QuoteBegin-Cronos+Oct 15 2004, 04:06 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Cronos @ Oct 15 2004, 04:06 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> This lets out a major question though. If you teleport a baby, whos conciousness hasnt yet had time to form... are you murdering him?
You are not ending his essence, but his physical form DOES die (even if it is replaced later down the track). A Definite gray area. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> that mspaintage completely confused me. ta!
The point about the baby also brings into question pro-life/anti-abortion sentiments that from the point of conception onwards, that they, having the potential to become human beings gives them certain rights that would make abortion illegal. Others argue that there is no consciousness, and thus it isn't murder.
I don't know, but I know that one of the reasons that they don't terminate pregnancies after a certain point is because babies do develop a consciousness and self-awareness as well as an awareness of their surroundings. That is why a child recognises its mother's voice.
human *copyOfMe; copyOfMe = new human(me->getMemory()); delete oldMe;
I think that its just a copy of you that would be created. Although I don't see anything wrong with it. I suppose some religious people may find the prospect of not being able to transfer what you may class as a soul to the new body scary <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Hey if it helps mankind survive, expand or more importantly help valve finish HL2 before I die. i'm all up for it.
The problems people would have on this, lie in the religous or spiritual sides of life. I have seperated these as most would count them the same, but I'm not a religous person infact quite the opposite believing in the science of things, But there are some things science hasn't answered yet, like what makes me me. I mean, what makes it me looking out from behind these eyes and not someone else. This leads me to the spiritual side, having a force that controls who is who and what is what, You could relate this to the film "Final Fantasy" and how the planet has a life source that is in everything and when that dies it goes back into the life source of the planet.
Now the problem with Teleporting is, is that life source controlled directly from the the information of how I am constructed on a sub-atomic level or some other means.
Therefore going back to the original question, I'm not sure I would use a teleporter without full and proper research. Even then it would be a difficult desicion to make knowing on the risks that are involved in any data transfer.
If teleportation is possible by the way you described it, then only the creating and not destroying is possible. Hence if you support teleportation, you must be able to back up the fact that having two copies of you is the same person for you to say that destroying one copy isn't destroying you (at least not completely).
I'm not picking sides. Don't get me wrong. I'm clarifying the issue.
For teleportation to be possible, three conditions have to be met: 1) A copy of the original is made 2) The old copy is deleted 3) The end result will be that the same person was moved from one place to another (as opposed to two different people)
So it must be that you believe these three of these conditions to be true for you to believe in teleportation. Therefore, if you believe a copy of a person can be made (not just a separate entity due to condition #3), you must believe that it is possible for one person to be in two different places at the same time. Flawed logic anybody?
Perhaps to make it work instead, you could say #3 is utter crap, but then you wouldn't be teleporting, but you would be creating a very similar person in another place and killing the old person.
You could argue that you could switch the order of condition #1 and #2, so that the original is deleted before the copy is made. However, for you to believe this, you first must believe the opposite order can be true as well. So this doesn't work.
<!--QuoteBegin-Hawkeye+Oct 17 2004, 10:47 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Hawkeye @ Oct 17 2004, 10:47 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> If teleportation is possible by the way you described it, then only the creating and not destroying is possible. Hence if you support teleportation, you must be able to back up the fact that having two copies of you is the same person for you to say that destroying one copy isn't destroying you (at least not completely).
I'm not picking sides. Don't get me wrong. I'm clarifying the issue.
For teleportation to be possible, three conditions have to be met: 1) A copy of the original is made 2) The old copy is deleted 3) The end result will be that the same person was moved from one place to another (as opposed to two different people)
So it must be that you believe these three of these conditions to be true for you to believe in teleportation. Therefore, if you believe a copy of a person can be made (not just a separate entity due to condition #3), you must believe that it is possible for one person to be in two different places at the same time. Flawed logic anybody?
Perhaps to make it work instead, you could say #3 is utter crap, but then you wouldn't be teleporting, but you would be creating a very similar person in another place and killing the old person.
You could argue that you could switch the order of condition #1 and #2, so that the original is deleted before the copy is made. However, for you to believe this, you first must believe the opposite order can be true as well. So this doesn't work.
Just brain storming. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Very good points. Can one person exist in two different places? This kind of relates to my previous post. Can my life source be copied and be the same in two different places?
As you've said, surely if you are deleting and copying you could forgo the deletion, the information can still be sent and made at the other end.
Unless for the information to actually be read, at sub-atomic level, you would have to be, in a way, decompiled, deleting the source as it is read. That would mean it would have to be done in a certain order meaning you couldn't keep the source, but it wouldn't stop you from reproducing the information several time in such creating exact copies of the same person down to the smallest detail, leading back to your issues.
Things at the subatomic level cannot be viewed without being changed. However, I don't see why it would be impossible to make multiple copies from that one template.
<!--QuoteBegin-Decimator+Oct 17 2004, 02:42 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Decimator @ Oct 17 2004, 02:42 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Things at the subatomic level cannot be viewed without being changed. However, I don't see why it would be impossible to make multiple copies from that one template. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Quantum Teleportation
Teleportation is the name given by science fiction writers to the feat of making an object or person disintegrate in one place while a perfect replica appears somewhere else. How this is accomplished is usually not explained in detail, but the general idea seems to be that the original object is scanned in such a way as to extract all the information from it, then this information is transmitted to the receiving location and used to construct the replica, not necessarily from the actual material of the original, but perhaps from atoms of the same kinds, arranged in exactly the same pattern as the original. A teleportation machine would be like a fax machine, except that it would work on 3-dimensional objects as well as documents, it would produce an exact copy rather than an approximate facsimile, and it would destroy the original in the process of scanning it. A few science fiction writers consider teleporters that preserve the original, and the plot gets complicated when the original and teleported versions of the same person meet; but the more common kind of teleporter destroys the original, functioning as a super transportation device, not as a perfect replicator of souls and bodies.
In 1993 an international group of six scientists, including IBM Fellow Charles H. Bennett, confirmed the intuitions of the majority of science fiction writers by showing that perfect teleportation is indeed possible in principle, but only if the original is destroyed. In subsequent years, other scientists have demonstrated teleportation experimentally in a variety of systems, including single photons, coherent light fields, nuclear spins, and trapped ions. Teleportation promises to be quite useful as an information processing primitive, facilitating long range quantum communication (perhaps unltimately leading to a "quantum internet"), and making it much easier to build a working quantum computer. But science fiction fans will be disappointed to learn that no one expects to be able to teleport people or other macroscopic objects in the foreseeable future, for a variety of engineering reasons, even though it would not violate any fundamental law to do so.
In the past, the idea of teleportation was not taken very seriously by scientists, because it was thought to violate the uncertainty principle of quantum mechanics, which forbids any measuring or scanning process from extracting all the information in an atom or other object. According to the uncertainty principle, the more accurately an object is scanned, the more it is disturbed by the scanning process, until one reaches a point where the object's original state has been completely disrupted, still without having extracted enough information to make a perfect replica. This sounds like a solid argument against teleportation: if one cannot extract enough information from an object to make a perfect copy, it would seem that a perfect copy cannot be made. But the six scientists found a way to make an end run around this logic, using a celebrated and paradoxical feature of quantum mechanics known as the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen effect. In brief, they found a way to scan out part of the information from an object A, which one wishes to teleport, while causing the remaining, unscanned, part of the information to pass, via the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen effect, into another object C which has never been in contact with A. Later, by applying to C a treatment depending on the scanned-out information, it is possible to maneuver C into exactly the same state as A was in before it was scanned. A itself is no longer in that state, having been thoroughly disrupted by the scanning, so what has been achieved is teleportation, not replication.
<img src='http://www.research.ibm.com/quantuminfo/teleportation/figureB.gif' border='0' alt='user posted image' /> As the figure to the left [above] suggests, the unscanned part of the information is conveyed from A to C by an intermediary object B, which interacts first with C and then with A. What? Can it really be correct to say "first with C and then with A"? Surely, in order to convey something from A to C, the delivery vehicle must visit A before C, not the other way around. But there is a subtle, unscannable kind of information that, unlike any material cargo, and even unlike ordinary information, can indeed be delivered in such a backward fashion. This subtle kind of information, also called "Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) correlation" or "entanglement", has been at least partly understood since the 1930s when it was discussed in a famous paper by Albert Einstein, Boris Podolsky, and Nathan Rosen. In the 1960s John Bell showed that a pair of entangled particles, which were once in contact but later move too far apart to interact directly, can exhibit individually random behavior that is too strongly correlated to be explained by classical statistics. Experiments on photons and other particles have repeatedly confirmed these correlations, thereby providing strong evidence for the validity of quantum mechanics, which neatly explains them. Another well-known fact about EPR correlations is that they cannot by themselves deliver a meaningful and controllable message. It was thought that their only usefulness was in proving the validity of quantum mechanics. But now it is known that, through the phenomenon of quantum teleportation, they can deliver exactly that part of the information in an object which is too delicate to be scanned out and delivered by conventional methods.
<img src='http://www.research.ibm.com/quantuminfo/teleportation/figureA.gif' border='0' alt='user posted image' /> This figure compares conventional facsimile transmission with quantum teleportation (see above). In conventional facsimile transmission the original is scanned, extracting partial information about it, but remains more or less intact after the scanning process. The scanned information is sent to the receiving station, where it is imprinted on some raw material (eg paper) to produce an approximate copy of the original. By contrast, in quantum teleportation, two objects B and C are first brought into contact and then separated. Object B is taken to the sending station, while object C is taken to the receiving station. At the sending station object B is scanned together with the original object A which one wishes to teleport, yielding some information and totally disrupting the state of A and B. The scanned information is sent to the receiving station, where it is used to select one of several treatments to be applied to object C, thereby putting C into an exact replica of the former state of A.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thats why.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->You require the oppurtunity at any frame of reference in which you would need to pass to reach your next instant of cognition, through your actions or someone elses, to recognize and remember your surrounding stimuli from one moment of your life to the next instant, even if it is forgotten in a second or stays with you through your lifetime.
Thus: If you're asleep, you can wake up. If you're cryogenically frozen, you can be thawed. If your heart stops, it can be restarted. If you're in a coma, you can wake up. If you're knocked out, you can be revived.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And if you teleport you can be assembled.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And that is, if you instantly transport somewhere: you would not have had the chance to remember every frame of reference you entered from your trips beginning to its destination and end. This also means (as I said before, somewhere), if you manage to go the speed of light you could remember every frame of reference you passed through (of course, time would stretch to infinity, and you'd use all the energy in the universe, but that's not really the point).<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You would have the chance, because, as I stated, you could be assembled at any point. And you would go the speed of light, as it wouldn't be your particles moving, it would be information about your particles moving. And information can move at the speed of light.
<!--QuoteBegin-Mantrid+Oct 17 2004, 07:25 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Mantrid @ Oct 17 2004, 07:25 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->You require the oppurtunity at any frame of reference in which you would need to pass to reach your next instant of cognition, through your actions or someone elses, to recognize and remember your surrounding stimuli from one moment of your life to the next instant, even if it is forgotten in a second or stays with you through your lifetime.
Thus: If you're asleep, you can wake up. If you're cryogenically frozen, you can be thawed. If your heart stops, it can be restarted. If you're in a coma, you can wake up. If you're knocked out, you can be revived.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And if you teleport you can be assembled.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And that is, if you instantly transport somewhere: you would not have had the chance to remember every frame of reference you entered from your trips beginning to its destination and end. This also means (as I said before, somewhere), if you manage to go the speed of light you could remember every frame of reference you passed through (of course, time would stretch to infinity, and you'd use all the energy in the universe, but that's not really the point).<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You would have the chance, because, as I stated, you could be assembled at any point. And you would go the speed of light, as it wouldn't be your particles moving, it would be information about your particles moving. And information can move at the speed of light. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> You require the oppurtunity at any frame of reference in which you would need to pass to reach your next instant of cognition, through your actions or someone elses, to recognize and remember your surrounding stimuli from one moment of your life to the next instant, even if it is forgotten in a second or stays with you through your lifetime.
The problem is, you can only be assembled if there is a machine to reassemble you. And you will not have the oppurtunity to experience the frames of reference from your transmission point to your destination point. Information doesn't work that way.
Say you have a radio, and all the equipment necessary to create, record and transmit a sound. What you're proposing is that the sound that's being transmitted can be <i>heard</i> at any point where the radio wave is travelling - instead of being received. Except you'd need a machine [radio] to reassemble the sound into something audible.
So in order for the oppurtunity to present itself, you'd need to be able to transmit the information for a person and have it spontaneously be able recombine itself into the person anywhere the transmitter wants. Since you're only transmitting the <i>data</i> you need a machine to recreate the person. So the oppurtunity to experience the stimuli only exists where you're teleporting from and where you're going and no where in between.
<!--QuoteBegin-Kester+Oct 17 2004, 04:37 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Kester @ Oct 17 2004, 04:37 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> That makes for an interesting read, thanks for posting it Mantrid. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> You know, I did post it in the second reply, its just that no one clicks links...
According to the idea that everything is Quantumed, (time, space, mass) then we are already being reassembled every quantum "time-period"(smallest amount of time possible). It might even be that right now, my entity at the end of my post is a different one that my entity at the beggining, but it still feels like I'm the same, and I will argue if anyone says that I really am different. By this same reasoning I would still be the same "me" at the end of the teleportation process.
What i mean by this (since im probably rambling because its so late) is that time goes in tiny little fragments. There is a small portion of time that is so small that you can not measure any less time, much like an atom is to the elements. Since time continually adds on these segments, you are being rebuilt over and over again near-instantly during the process of transfering from one segment to the next. Since teleportation would be instant and not even take up this tiny fragment of quantumed time, why would it have so much worse consquences?
It's convenient to think that viewing the source might disrupt the original copy, though at the beginning of this thread, we are assuming the principle that we get around that theory somehow.
Even if it did destroy the original, we would have the information that could be sent to any other teleportation spot, so you could be sent back to the place where you started and reassembled just as Kester said, right?
Unless there is a problem with making another copy somewhere, I don't see a problem with what i said about the same person existing in the same place being true, which in my mind anyway, seems like flawed logic since you cannot be in two places at once.
But if i took on what Mantrid post correctly, something needs to be taken from the recieving site and given to the sending site before a transfer can take place, thus said I'm not sure if it would be possible to make multiple copies with out the original material from the recieving site being mixed with the sending material, as the sending material is destroyed when mixed with the recieving sites material, replicating it would be near impossible without then destroying that information, making it only possible to ever have one set of information. I might of just read what Mantrid posted wrong but this is my take on it.
Yes, the original has to be severly disrupted in order to obtain the information (which includes the intertwined other piece of information) due to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.
[WHO]ThemYou can call me DaveJoin Date: 2002-12-11Member: 10593Members, Constellation
This question really needs to be divided into 2 schools of thought.
1. If you believe in the existance of a supernatural ethereal thingy known as a soul. Then this question is impossible to answer until you yourself try it. If you show up in whatever afterlife you happen to believe in, then you were wrong.....HA-HA
2. If you believe that the human brain is just the weirdest thing ever and that there is no soul. Then you really have to abstract the idea to the fact that it *can* be easily used for cloning. Then realize that clones are *not* you. And if, after all that, you still wanna step into that thing, well then I would be normally happy to see you go, but in the end you're not actually being removed from the gene pool, so nothing is lost, and nothing is gained.
So, drop the whole explanation of "chance to experience", because it's become the most convoluted and unapplicable answer that anyone could even try to use in this situation.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->1. If you believe in the existance of a supernatural ethereal thingy known as a soul. Then this question is impossible to answer until you yourself try it. If you show up in whatever afterlife you happen to believe in, then you were wrong.....HA-HA<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> True, but if you happen to wake up at your destination, you still won't know if it was a success or not, because for all you know, you're the copy of the guy that died in heaven. HA-HA <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
[WHO]ThemYou can call me DaveJoin Date: 2002-12-11Member: 10593Members, Constellation
<!--QuoteBegin-Hawkeye+Oct 20 2004, 07:15 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Hawkeye @ Oct 20 2004, 07:15 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->1. If you believe in the existance of a supernatural ethereal thingy known as a soul. Then this question is impossible to answer until you yourself try it. If you show up in whatever afterlife you happen to believe in, then you were wrong.....HA-HA<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> True, but if you happen to wake up at your destination, you still won't know if it was a success or not, because for all you know, you're the copy of the guy that died in heaven. HA-HA <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I think you missed the whole point of what I just said. If you believe in a supernatural soul, then it is assumed that you can't just copy it because it is not physically part of the body.
Well something is going to be on the side, whether it is you, or a soulless you.. something. Otherwise, I doubt they'd be teleporting people if they died in a horrible horrible fashion each time.
<!--QuoteBegin-Hawkeye+Oct 20 2004, 01:01 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Hawkeye @ Oct 20 2004, 01:01 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Well something is going to be on the side, whether it is you, or a soulless you.. something. Otherwise, I doubt they'd be teleporting people if they died in a horrible horrible fashion each time. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I think that would make the whole thing funner <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Clone pops out in another galaxy, original runs through the 'grindabrasion' machine <!--emo&::marine::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/marine.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='marine.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Hawkeye+Oct 20 2004, 07:01 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Hawkeye @ Oct 20 2004, 07:01 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Well something is going to be on the side, whether it is you, or a soulless you.. something. Otherwise, I doubt they'd be teleporting people if they died in a horrible horrible fashion each time. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I think what he ment is, the soul that is part of the person to be teleported can't be teleported as its an entity and not a physical thing which can be recorded, so it might very well die and go to its afterlife, when the body is teleported. Granted something will be on the otherside, this body might very well have a different soul, so yes it would still live, but it wouldn't be you. Biologically yes it would, but its soul would be different.
Comments
Show me another method. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
...Show me any mode of teleportation above sub-atomic particles...
Please get back on topic and start a new one for the, "Hey, how many types of teleportation are there?" discussion.
I'm for the picture a few pages back. Something I haven't noted yet, though: I'd be willing to dematerialize myself and send the data across the universe to save or help someone I'd be willing to die for, though <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo--> . Although, you'll never know which part is right...It'd be nice if teleporting through destruction worked...it just doesn't look like it would on any basis (especially since it's new material).
They would appear to be the same person, and for all intents and purposes they are you, exactly the same as if you had been transported by pixie dust instead and hadn't been killed in the process. They become different once they start to experience different things from the original, who is dead.
There have been cases before of people being clinically dead coming back to life. Does it mean that just because they were dead then they can't be the same person they were before?
This harks back to my sleep question, which was misunderstood, I think. I understand that you think it is that you have the chance to experience things, but I disagree. If I am dead, and somebody moves me from one table to another to save my life and then my heart starts again (just imagine =D), then I didn't have the chance to experience it, as I was dead, but I am still there.
and I love wizard's question about the colour the ground . That made me just sit up and really boggle.
Unfortunately I live in Australia, so the ground could be red on either.
<.<
>.>
Maybe I live on mars?
This results in myself being teleported, but the machine forgot to destroy the original in BOTH cases.
The result is, there are three of me now. One is working in the sulfur mines of Venus, ensuring the atmospheric shielding system stays online. The other is working on Mars helping the Terraforming process take place. While fuddy duddy old me is still on Earth posting on message boards drinking coke and otherwise wasting his life.
Now, had the teleporter NOT malfunctioned, I WOULD HAVE BEEN KILLED AND THIS CONSTITUTES A MURDER.
The copy is me for all intents and purposes, but he is a seperate ENTITY of me, he has my essence, my memories, my thoughts and my feelings, but he is another container and thus over time he will differ from me. The Me on mars will come to be entranced by the hardiness of life and it's utter determination to survive. The Me on Venus becomes a hardened man seeing far too many men lost to the crushing poisoning cloistering atmosphere. Meanwhile the Me on earth has found new uses for navel lindt and goes on to become a trillionaire.
Using the flame example, If I were a lit match, and I were to be held to an unlit match and another flame were to spring forth, then he would be a copy of me, but he would evolve to become a different person given enough time. If I were snuffed out, and the other allowed to live, that is no less a murder then cloning me and then killing me.
Now, if you transferred my conciousness over into a machine, then destroyed my body, that would not be a murder because my sentience is still intact. If I were sent along with the datastream on how to construct my body, then that would be okay.
But the destruction of the vessel within which my conciousness resides is a murder. No copy can take my place, and by that same token I can take none of my copies places. Each individual, despite being utterly the same to begin with has every right to live.
Killing a man while he sleeps is murder. The method of teleportation presented in the first post is no different then making a clone of me, transferring a copy of my memories into him and then killing me. <b>I</b> am still dead. My <i>Essence</i> may continue to exist but <b>I</b> cease to exist as a person.
Consider it to be a mathematical equation.
My particular conciousness may have the equation...
Y = X^4+6X^2+loge(15)
My copy has the SAME equation, but as life goes on, differences may accrue in the constant, so although he is essentially the same person in the sense of ESSENCE, his particulate conciousness may read like...
Y = X^4+6X^2+e^(3)
or
Y = X^4+6X^2+sin(33)
or even
Y = X^4+6X^2 + (4X^3+12X) <----- Life Shattering Event!
perhaps even
Y = X^4+6X^2 + X^5/5+3X^3 + C <------- Life Building Event!
Granted that life cannot be reduced to mere simplistic equations, but each equation is absolutely unique provided that the constants that seperate them are different.
In other words, I follow a particular pattern of behaviour layed down by my history as shown in the initial psuedo-conciousness equation Y = X^4+6X^2. Provided the additional factor of loge(15) is my current environment, and hence will change if I teleport to another location. The second last equation, Y = X^4+6X^2 + (4X^3+12X), is the original equation followed by it's differential. This is an analogy to a life shattering event, such as my copy learning that the colony he has teleported to has strict rules and that he will be lobotomised and forced into slave labour for the rest of his life for sneezing. The last equation is the original followed by it's integral (or anti-differential) which in this manner is used to draw an analogy to a life building event, such as, finding the woman of my dreams on that colony, or becoming the leader of a particular colony and leading it onwards to prosperity.
This lets out a major question though. If you teleport a baby, whos conciousness hasnt yet had time to form... are you murdering him?
You are not ending his essence, but his physical form DOES die (even if it is replaced later down the track). A Definite gray area.
Oh, by the way, an MS paint job to help illustrate some of my early points.
They would appear to be the same person, and for all intents and purposes they are you, exactly the same as if you had been transported by pixie dust instead and hadn't been killed in the process. They become different once they start to experience different things from the original, who is dead.
There have been cases before of people being clinically dead coming back to life. Does it mean that just because they were dead then they can't be the same person they were before?
This harks back to my sleep question, which was misunderstood, I think. I understand that you think it is that you have the chance to experience things, but I disagree. If I am dead, and somebody moves me from one table to another to save my life and then my heart starts again (just imagine =D), then I didn't have the chance to experience it, as I was dead, but I am still there.
and I love wizard's question about the colour the ground . That made me just sit up and really boggle.
Unfortunately I live in Australia, so the ground could be red on either.
<.<
>.>
Maybe I live on mars? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm still going to say you have a chance (be it incredibly minimal) to wake up while 'clinically' dead. Just because your heart stops doesn't make you dead that instant, just because you're considered dead based on the fact the main organ keeping you alive has stopped. You'll maintain your life until there's no point at which you can be revived (with any point in between giving you a chance of becoming alive again).
It's the same way if you were cryogenically put to sleep. Say you've got so many drugs in you that you can't wake up yourself (so, technically, there's not chance you'd wake up - which in a way gets around my definition), however, once someone decides to stop the drugs and cryogenic freezer, you're up again.
Trying to think of an easier way to say it.
You require the oppurtunity at any frame of reference in which you would need to pass to reach your next instant of cognition, through your actions or someone elses, to recognize and remember your surrounding stimuli from one moment of your life to the next instant, even if it is forgotten in a second or stays with you through your lifetime.
Thus:
If you're asleep, you can wake up.
If you're cryogenically frozen, you can be thawed.
If your heart stops, it can be restarted.
If you're in a coma, you can wake up.
If you're knocked out, you can be revived.
And that is, if you instantly transport somewhere: you would not have had the chance to remember every frame of reference you entered from your trips beginning to its destination and end. This also means (as I said before, somewhere), if you manage to go the speed of light you could remember every frame of reference you passed through (of course, time would stretch to infinity, and you'd use all the energy in the universe, but that's not really the point).
and I love wizard's question about the colour the ground . That made me just sit up and really boggle.
Unfortunately I live in Australia, so the ground could be red on either.
<.<
>.>
Maybe I live on mars? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thats why I pose such questions in these threads. It isn't the answer that matters but rather thought process you follow while trying to come up with an answer.
If you really wanted to get tricky the ground would be 1/2 red and 1/2 brown until you looked at it.
You are not ending his essence, but his physical form DOES die (even if it is replaced later down the track). A Definite gray area. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
that mspaintage completely confused me. ta!
The point about the baby also brings into question pro-life/anti-abortion sentiments that from the point of conception onwards, that they, having the potential to become human beings gives them certain rights that would make abortion illegal. Others argue that there is no consciousness, and thus it isn't murder.
I don't know, but I know that one of the reasons that they don't terminate pregnancies after a certain point is because babies do develop a consciousness and self-awareness as well as an awareness of their surroundings. That is why a child recognises its mother's voice.
human *copyOfMe;
copyOfMe = new human(me->getMemory());
delete oldMe;
I think that its just a copy of you that would be created. Although I don't see anything wrong with it. I suppose some religious people may find the prospect of not being able to transfer what you may class as a soul to the new body scary <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Hey if it helps mankind survive, expand or more importantly help valve finish HL2 before I die. i'm all up for it.
The problems people would have on this, lie in the religous or spiritual sides of life. I have seperated these as most would count them the same, but I'm not a religous person infact quite the opposite believing in the science of things, But there are some things science hasn't answered yet, like what makes me me. I mean, what makes it me looking out from behind these eyes and not someone else. This leads me to the spiritual side, having a force that controls who is who and what is what, You could relate this to the film "Final Fantasy" and how the planet has a life source that is in everything and when that dies it goes back into the life source of the planet.
Now the problem with Teleporting is, is that life source controlled directly from the the information of how I am constructed on a sub-atomic level or some other means.
Therefore going back to the original question, I'm not sure I would use a teleporter without full and proper research. Even then it would be a difficult desicion to make knowing on the risks that are involved in any data transfer.
Yeah, make sense. I definitely want you to kill me.
I'm not picking sides. Don't get me wrong. I'm clarifying the issue.
For teleportation to be possible, three conditions have to be met:
1) A copy of the original is made
2) The old copy is deleted
3) The end result will be that the same person was moved from one place to another (as opposed to two different people)
So it must be that you believe these three of these conditions to be true for you to believe in teleportation. Therefore, if you believe a copy of a person can be made (not just a separate entity due to condition #3), you must believe that it is possible for one person to be in two different places at the same time. Flawed logic anybody?
Perhaps to make it work instead, you could say #3 is utter crap, but then you wouldn't be teleporting, but you would be creating a very similar person in another place and killing the old person.
You could argue that you could switch the order of condition #1 and #2, so that the original is deleted before the copy is made. However, for you to believe this, you first must believe the opposite order can be true as well. So this doesn't work.
Just brain storming.
I'm not picking sides. Don't get me wrong. I'm clarifying the issue.
For teleportation to be possible, three conditions have to be met:
1) A copy of the original is made
2) The old copy is deleted
3) The end result will be that the same person was moved from one place to another (as opposed to two different people)
So it must be that you believe these three of these conditions to be true for you to believe in teleportation. Therefore, if you believe a copy of a person can be made (not just a separate entity due to condition #3), you must believe that it is possible for one person to be in two different places at the same time. Flawed logic anybody?
Perhaps to make it work instead, you could say #3 is utter crap, but then you wouldn't be teleporting, but you would be creating a very similar person in another place and killing the old person.
You could argue that you could switch the order of condition #1 and #2, so that the original is deleted before the copy is made. However, for you to believe this, you first must believe the opposite order can be true as well. So this doesn't work.
Just brain storming. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Very good points. Can one person exist in two different places? This kind of relates to my previous post. Can my life source be copied and be the same in two different places?
As you've said, surely if you are deleting and copying you could forgo the deletion, the information can still be sent and made at the other end.
Unless for the information to actually be read, at sub-atomic level, you would have to be, in a way, decompiled, deleting the source as it is read. That would mean it would have to be done in a certain order meaning you couldn't keep the source, but it wouldn't stop you from reproducing the information several time in such creating exact copies of the same person down to the smallest detail, leading back to your issues.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Quantum Teleportation
Teleportation is the name given by science fiction writers to the feat of making an object or person disintegrate in one place while a perfect replica appears somewhere else. How this is accomplished is usually not explained in detail, but the general idea seems to be that the original object is scanned in such a way as to extract all the information from it, then this information is transmitted to the receiving location and used to construct the replica, not necessarily from the actual material of the original, but perhaps from atoms of the same kinds, arranged in exactly the same pattern as the original. A teleportation machine would be like a fax machine, except that it would work on 3-dimensional objects as well as documents, it would produce an exact copy rather than an approximate facsimile, and it would destroy the original in the process of scanning it. A few science fiction writers consider teleporters that preserve the original, and the plot gets complicated when the original and teleported versions of the same person meet; but the more common kind of teleporter destroys the original, functioning as a super transportation device, not as a perfect replicator of souls and bodies.
In 1993 an international group of six scientists, including IBM Fellow Charles H. Bennett, confirmed the intuitions of the majority of science fiction writers by showing that perfect teleportation is indeed possible in principle, but only if the original is destroyed. In subsequent years, other scientists have demonstrated teleportation experimentally in a variety of systems, including single photons, coherent light fields, nuclear spins, and trapped ions. Teleportation promises to be quite useful as an information processing primitive, facilitating long range quantum communication (perhaps unltimately leading to a "quantum internet"), and making it much easier to build a working quantum computer. But science fiction fans will be disappointed to learn that no one expects to be able to teleport people or other macroscopic objects in the foreseeable future, for a variety of engineering reasons, even though it would not violate any fundamental law to do so.
In the past, the idea of teleportation was not taken very seriously by scientists, because it was thought to violate the uncertainty principle of quantum mechanics, which forbids any measuring or scanning process from extracting all the information in an atom or other object. According to the uncertainty principle, the more accurately an object is scanned, the more it is disturbed by the scanning process, until one reaches a point where the object's original state has been completely disrupted, still without having extracted enough information to make a perfect replica. This sounds like a solid argument against teleportation: if one cannot extract enough information from an object to make a perfect copy, it would seem that a perfect copy cannot be made. But the six scientists found a way to make an end run around this logic, using a celebrated and paradoxical feature of quantum mechanics known as the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen effect. In brief, they found a way to scan out part of the information from an object A, which one wishes to teleport, while causing the remaining, unscanned, part of the information to pass, via the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen effect, into another object C which has
never been in contact with A. Later, by applying to C a treatment depending on the scanned-out information, it is possible to maneuver C into exactly the same state as A was in before it was scanned. A itself is no longer in that state, having been thoroughly disrupted by the scanning, so what has been achieved is teleportation, not replication.
<img src='http://www.research.ibm.com/quantuminfo/teleportation/figureB.gif' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
As the figure to the left [above] suggests, the unscanned part of the information is conveyed from A to C by an intermediary object B, which interacts first with C and then with A. What? Can it really be correct to say "first with C and then with A"? Surely, in order to convey something from A to C, the delivery vehicle must visit A before C, not the other way around. But there is a subtle, unscannable kind of information that, unlike any material cargo, and even unlike ordinary information, can indeed be delivered in such a backward fashion. This subtle kind of information, also called "Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) correlation" or "entanglement", has been at least partly understood since the 1930s when it was discussed in a famous paper by Albert Einstein, Boris Podolsky, and Nathan Rosen. In the 1960s John Bell showed that a pair of entangled particles, which were once in contact but later move too far apart to interact directly, can exhibit individually random behavior that is too strongly correlated to be explained by classical statistics. Experiments on photons and other particles have repeatedly confirmed these correlations, thereby providing strong evidence for the validity of quantum mechanics, which neatly explains them. Another well-known fact about EPR correlations is that they cannot by themselves deliver a meaningful and controllable message. It was thought that their only usefulness was in proving the validity of quantum mechanics. But now it is known that, through the phenomenon of quantum teleportation, they can deliver exactly that part of the information in an object which is too delicate to be scanned out and delivered by conventional methods.
<img src='http://www.research.ibm.com/quantuminfo/teleportation/figureA.gif' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
This figure compares conventional facsimile transmission with quantum teleportation (see above). In conventional facsimile transmission the original is scanned, extracting partial information about it, but remains more or less intact after the scanning process. The scanned information is sent to the receiving station, where it is imprinted on some raw material (eg paper) to produce an approximate copy of the original. By contrast, in quantum teleportation, two objects B and C are first brought into contact and then separated. Object B is taken to the sending station, while object C is taken to the receiving station. At the sending station object B is scanned together with the original object A which one wishes to teleport, yielding some information and totally disrupting the state of A and B. The scanned information is sent to the receiving station, where it is used to select one of several treatments to be applied to object C, thereby putting C into an exact replica of the former state of A.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thats why.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->You require the oppurtunity at any frame of reference in which you would need to pass to reach your next instant of cognition, through your actions or someone elses, to recognize and remember your surrounding stimuli from one moment of your life to the next instant, even if it is forgotten in a second or stays with you through your lifetime.
Thus:
If you're asleep, you can wake up.
If you're cryogenically frozen, you can be thawed.
If your heart stops, it can be restarted.
If you're in a coma, you can wake up.
If you're knocked out, you can be revived.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And if you teleport you can be assembled.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And that is, if you instantly transport somewhere: you would not have had the chance to remember every frame of reference you entered from your trips beginning to its destination and end. This also means (as I said before, somewhere), if you manage to go the speed of light you could remember every frame of reference you passed through (of course, time would stretch to infinity, and you'd use all the energy in the universe, but that's not really the point).<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You would have the chance, because, as I stated, you could be assembled at any point. And you would go the speed of light, as it wouldn't be your particles moving, it would be information about your particles moving. And information can move at the speed of light.
Thus:
If you're asleep, you can wake up.
If you're cryogenically frozen, you can be thawed.
If your heart stops, it can be restarted.
If you're in a coma, you can wake up.
If you're knocked out, you can be revived.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And if you teleport you can be assembled.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And that is, if you instantly transport somewhere: you would not have had the chance to remember every frame of reference you entered from your trips beginning to its destination and end. This also means (as I said before, somewhere), if you manage to go the speed of light you could remember every frame of reference you passed through (of course, time would stretch to infinity, and you'd use all the energy in the universe, but that's not really the point).<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You would have the chance, because, as I stated, you could be assembled at any point. And you would go the speed of light, as it wouldn't be your particles moving, it would be information about your particles moving. And information can move at the speed of light. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
You require the oppurtunity at any frame of reference in which you would need to pass to reach your next instant of cognition, through your actions or someone elses, to recognize and remember your surrounding stimuli from one moment of your life to the next instant, even if it is forgotten in a second or stays with you through your lifetime.
The problem is, you can only be assembled if there is a machine to reassemble you. And you will not have the oppurtunity to experience the frames of reference from your transmission point to your destination point. Information doesn't work that way.
Say you have a radio, and all the equipment necessary to create, record and transmit a sound. What you're proposing is that the sound that's being transmitted can be <i>heard</i> at any point where the radio wave is travelling - instead of being received. Except you'd need a machine [radio] to reassemble the sound into something audible.
So in order for the oppurtunity to present itself, you'd need to be able to transmit the information for a person and have it spontaneously be able recombine itself into the person anywhere the transmitter wants. Since you're only transmitting the <i>data</i> you need a machine to recreate the person. So the oppurtunity to experience the stimuli only exists where you're teleporting from and where you're going and no where in between.
You know, I did post it in the second reply, its just that no one clicks links...
What i mean by this (since im probably rambling because its so late) is that time goes in tiny little fragments. There is a small portion of time that is so small that you can not measure any less time, much like an atom is to the elements. Since time continually adds on these segments, you are being rebuilt over and over again near-instantly during the process of transfering from one segment to the next. Since teleportation would be instant and not even take up this tiny fragment of quantumed time, why would it have so much worse consquences?
Even if it did destroy the original, we would have the information that could be sent to any other teleportation spot, so you could be sent back to the place where you started and reassembled just as Kester said, right?
Unless there is a problem with making another copy somewhere, I don't see a problem with what i said about the same person existing in the same place being true, which in my mind anyway, seems like flawed logic since you cannot be in two places at once.
I hope that makes sence.
This is a paradox-
THE SENTENCE BELOW IS FALSE.
THE SENTENCE ABOVE IS TRUE.
I wouldn't use the teleporter, it's basically killing you then creating you again. Also, how would you get every single atom that humans are made of?
1. If you believe in the existance of a supernatural ethereal thingy known as a soul. Then this question is impossible to answer until you yourself try it. If you show up in whatever afterlife you happen to believe in, then you were wrong.....HA-HA
2. If you believe that the human brain is just the weirdest thing ever and that there is no soul. Then you really have to abstract the idea to the fact that it *can* be easily used for cloning. Then realize that clones are *not* you. And if, after all that, you still wanna step into that thing, well then I would be normally happy to see you go, but in the end you're not actually being removed from the gene pool, so nothing is lost, and nothing is gained.
So, drop the whole explanation of "chance to experience", because it's become the most convoluted and unapplicable answer that anyone could even try to use in this situation.
True, but if you happen to wake up at your destination, you still won't know if it was a success or not, because for all you know, you're the copy of the guy that died in heaven. HA-HA <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
True, but if you happen to wake up at your destination, you still won't know if it was a success or not, because for all you know, you're the copy of the guy that died in heaven. HA-HA <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think you missed the whole point of what I just said. If you believe in a supernatural soul, then it is assumed that you can't just copy it because it is not physically part of the body.
I think that would make the whole thing funner <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Clone pops out in another galaxy, original runs through the 'grindabrasion' machine <!--emo&::marine::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/marine.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='marine.gif' /><!--endemo-->
I think what he ment is, the soul that is part of the person to be teleported can't be teleported as its an entity and not a physical thing which can be recorded, so it might very well die and go to its afterlife, when the body is teleported. Granted something will be on the otherside, this body might very well have a different soul, so yes it would still live, but it wouldn't be you. Biologically yes it would, but its soul would be different.
wow..........good thread.....